canon rumors FORUM

The quote from Maeda certainly looks like Canon is playing the role of the front-runner. Apparently, they've got a bunch of tech and several prototypes, and were just waiting for Nikon to tip their hand so they can one-up them. Now, before everyone gets too excited, as I said in a previous post, Canon will not put all of their best tech in these cameras: they will do just enough to take a clear edge, and then profit from the next cycle as well.

I guess I'll stay with the 5D mark II then. Speed and AF is nice, but in those cases I almost always want more reach and use APS-C instead (7D). What I really desire is substantial sensor improvements at ISO100, and that is probably not going to happen.

It seems to me that the 5Dmk3 may be a mild evolved version, do as little as possible to please as many as possible, but no bold features. ISO performance will certainly be worse than 1DX, but will it be better than 5Dmk2? They don't need to make it better. Improving the AF is the only thing they really need to do, and then add some speed to differentiate from the competition.

The bolded part of the above quote basically translates to, “we have one, give us a bit to tear a D800 apart and make sure ours is better”.

I don't think that's what he is saying at all. He is simply saying exactly what every other camera company is saying: if we think there is demand for it, we'll make one. However by the time that gets made if it is not already in development, it could be several years before it shows up. For instance, canon knew there was demand for a D700 fast fps camera competitor. how long did it take to make one? still waiting.

Let's put the fan cap down and put the thinking cap on. Canon is betting that their audience will be ok with 22MP just like nikon used to bet that their audience would be happy with 12. They think there will be some benefits that will make the product appealing just like nikon knows there are some benefits that will make theirs appealing.

I'm sure both companies are looking at each other and reasize they totally missjudged where the other was going to go. And off course both are capable of easily releasing models to trump each other again. Nikon could just as easly top the 5DIII with a D800s as canon could top the D800 with a 5DX. However expecting either one next month is just silly.

The interesting thing about a 22MP 5DIII is that once again the budget full frame is divided by two completely opposite camera models that essentially swapped places compared to the last generation. Nikon is now big MP game and a landscape/studio dream, canon is now fast fps game which should keep a lot of action/sports guys happy.

Quote

The quote from Maeda certainly looks like Canon is playing the role of the front-runner. Apparently, they've got a bunch of tech and several prototypes, and were just waiting for Nikon to tip their hand so they can one-up them. Now, before everyone gets too excited, as I said in a previous post, Canon will not put all of their best tech in these cameras: they will do just enough to take a clear edge, and then profit from the next cycle as well.

First of all, corporate guys talk like that. It's their job even if they have nothing in the drawing board. Nikon and others do this as well. as a matter of fact, several prototypes are the norm. Neither nikon nor canon can't create something the other can't match or surpass once the specs are known. It's the leap frog game and canon has gotten leapfrogged just as many time as nikon. Bring a phased out prototype to market is much more complicated. Both canon/nikon realized the other's position likely months ago but in the dev cycle and the big picture their bets are set. I think both are making good moves. However, their responses to the current models won't be seen for years.

« Last Edit: February 14, 2012, 08:44:50 AM by psolberg »

Logged

Neeneko

the way Canon develops new product is to satisfy the needs of professional photographers. For instance, the introduction of EOS-1D X is to satisfy professional photographers to photoshoot sports events like the Olympics, in terms of their requirement of high FPS and high image quality under high ISO settings.

I find this comment confusing.. if their 'way' is to develop products for professional photographers.. why are they making video cameras in SLR form? It really feels like videoographers, at minimal, share equal weight.. at this point probably more.

baldusi

The true genius of the D800 was the D800E. I would gladly take an 22Mpx 5dmkIII. But I want to be able to have no anti alias filter. It makes a world of difference for sharpness, and it wouldn't hurt the sort of photography that the 5D shooters usually do. In any case, you could always buy it with the AA filter.On the other hand, when pixel peeping the D3s and the D4, I find the high iso setting have lots of noise reduction and correspondingly very little sharpness. It's clear that the 1Dx has better underlying noise characteristics. So I hope to get that quality in the 5DmkIII, I don't care how many pixels.

The true genius of the D800 was the D800E. I would gladly take an 22Mpx 5dmkIII. But I want to be able to have no anti alias filter. It makes a world of difference for sharpness, and it wouldn't hurt the sort of photography that the 5D shooters usually do. In any case, you could always buy it with the AA filter.On the other hand, when pixel peeping the D3s and the D4, I find the high iso setting have lots of noise reduction and correspondingly very little sharpness. It's clear that the 1Dx has better underlying noise characteristics. So I hope to get that quality in the 5DmkIII, I don't care how many pixels.

What would be awesome is if they could somehow enable or disable the AA filter via a menu setting.

On the other hand, when pixel peeping the D3s and the D4, I find the high iso setting have lots of noise reduction and correspondingly very little sharpness. It's clear that the 1Dx has better underlying noise characteristics.

+1. I cannot shake the feeling that the D4 was a bit of a panic-reaction to the 1DX

The true genius of the D800 was the D800E. I would gladly take an 22Mpx 5dmkIII. But I want to be able to have no anti alias filter. It makes a world of difference for sharpness, and it wouldn't hurt the sort of photography that the 5D shooters usually do. In any case, you could always buy it with the AA filter.On the other hand, when pixel peeping the D3s and the D4, I find the high iso setting have lots of noise reduction and correspondingly very little sharpness. It's clear that the 1Dx has better underlying noise characteristics. So I hope to get that quality in the 5DmkIII, I don't care how many pixels.

What would be awesome is if they could somehow enable or disable the AA filter via a menu setting.

The true genius of the D800 was the D800E. I would gladly take an 22Mpx 5dmkIII. But I want to be able to have no anti alias filter. It makes a world of difference for sharpness, and it wouldn't hurt the sort of photography that the 5D shooters usually do. In any case, you could always buy it with the AA filter.On the other hand, when pixel peeping the D3s and the D4, I find the high iso setting have lots of noise reduction and correspondingly very little sharpness. It's clear that the 1Dx has better underlying noise characteristics. So I hope to get that quality in the 5DmkIII, I don't care how many pixels.

I don't think the few comparisons that have been made can reach that conclusion. IMO the nikon is about a half stop over the 1DX simply because of the larget photosites, but you need to keep in mind that comparing jpgs is a futile thing to do when they aren't even the same subject and light. Once somebody like DXO/ dpreview or other lab tests raws we will know for sure. However, as I said, I expect the lower MP nikon to fair better. However, the difference will certainly be smaller than with the past generation.

The more relevant question is just how much better will 22mp be over nikon's 36mp. clearly canon will have the advantage in low light but the 5DII wasn't bad and what will a 36MP file resampled to 22MP look like?

Quote

+1. I cannot shake the feeling that the D4 was a bit of a panic-reaction to the 1DX

I don't think so. As I said, we've yet to see a real test. These cameras take years to develop. neither is a panic raction to anything.

The true genius of the D800 was the D800E. I would gladly take an 22Mpx 5dmkIII. But I want to be able to have no anti alias filter. It makes a world of difference for sharpness, and it wouldn't hurt the sort of photography that the 5D shooters usually do. In any case, you could always buy it with the AA filter.

I don't really understand not wanting megapixels because resolution is not important, but want to skip AA filter because, ehh, resolution is important? As I see it, it is only a good idea to drop the AA filter when the resolution of the sensor is high (like on the D800), meaning that diffraction will typically kill moire/aliasing problem and thus further blurring would be unnecessary.

No AA filter is better suited for those that has slow workflows with lots of PP, such as studio/landscape, that is for a megapixel monster, not for an all-around camera.

canon rumors FORUM

I'd buy a 22MP 5D-family camera with pro-AF and 6.9 FPS in a heartbeat. It's exactly what we dreamed the 5D Mark II could have been in an ideal world. at the end of the day, 22 MP is a decent all-around useful number, although I'd prefer a push to 24 MP or 28 MP (even if that brought shooting speed down fractionally to 6.3 FPS to match the former 50D). can't wait for this to drop, even though I'll be shooting my 5D Mark II until the shutter dies before I upgrade.

I don't think the few comparisons that have been made can reach that conclusion. IMO the nikon is about a half stop over the 1DX simply because of the larget photosites, but you need to keep in mind that comparing jpgs is a futile thing to do when they aren't even the same subject and light. Once somebody like DXO/ dpreview or other lab tests raws we will know for sure. However, as I said, I expect the lower MP nikon to fair better. However, the difference will certainly be smaller than with the past generation.

I'm not sure about that. Why would Canon give the 1DX a native range up until 51,200 where the D4 is limited to 12,800 (not talking about digital boost, they reach the same)? I don't think Canon would do that unless they're pretty sure they can at least match the performance, not to say surpass it by 2 stops...